Evan Fournier money, with an extra year. Does that make it an "unmovable" contract?
We're out of the max space game now.
It means they don’t want to move him. But I have a feeling he’s more movable than Fournier would have been. Cap could be 7-10% higher next year, and will be a minimum of 3%, so relative to the cap Smart’s deal is still cheaper.
In the off-season Smart will have four years left, all guaranteed. Fournier will have two years left, plus a team option. I think the two year deal will be at least equally moveable.
Regardless, the fan base has been misled a bit, no? We’re told we can’t add long term free agents due to “flexibility”, then our ability to sign a max free agent (or bundle our expirings) is voluntarily surrendered.
Now, we’ve got no real flexibility, no way of winning in the near future. We gave away the #16 pick not to becom competitive, but rather only to save money. Now we’re locked into a team with a mediocre third best player for half of a decade.
Fireworks.
Why are we bringing up the Kemba trade again here? We all knew AND agreed that he needed to me moved, and he was moved. That we saved money is a bonus, that people began writing fan-fiction about next year and what not, that's another story. The team we traded him to, a team that is collecting picks left and right bought him off because of apparent low trade value...
Bringing the Kemba trade as "evidence" of ownership being cheap is not strengthening the argument, but distracting from it.
Where does anything above mention “evidence” of ownership being cheap?
We are a luxury tax team without being a contender and with no means to improve our roster next summer. That’s the reality of the situation. I’m not sure what you’re getting at.
Correct. If we were content to be a mid-tier playoff team, we should have just kept Kemba for the next two seasons. Our ceiling would have been about the same, and we would have kept our pick.
So it's your argument that our team with Horford is not not more competitive than with Kemba? If that's your contention, then that's fine. I think we're better and more balanced without Kemba and with Horford on-board... even more so now that we have Schroder this season (but that shouldn't factor at this point).
We may be marginally better, but we are no closer to a championship. We don’t have a clear direction, but we do have close to 100% of the cap tied up in three players, one of whom is a defense only role-player (who didn’t play much defense last year) and is a “team leader” that doesn’t seem to lead very much.
1. Smart isn't a defense-only player. He's a willing passer and a reliable PnR ball handler. Too bad we mostly use him off the ball.
2. The media may have gotten our plan wrong all along. You said it yourself numerous times: If we were to sign a max free agent, we'd have to gut our current roster. Not sure why you're complaining now. You didn't like the max-free-agent plan anyway.
Perhaps we are planning to go after Beal at the trade deadline or via a sign and trade next summer. If so, re-signing Smart ain't no problem whatsoever. Btw, I'm pretty sure we can trade Smart at the trade deadline. The rules are different this year due to the shortened season.
Horford + prospect(s) + picks for Beal/Siakam would be a valid trade, salary-wise.
Alternatively (this would be my #1 choice):
Smart + Schroder + JRich + picks for Simmons
All very logical, I have to agree
almost all the way down. As usual, very sharp analysis.
I see that you have not given up your interest in bringing in Simmons - good for you, the media hype on him distorts the true picture, I think, and is biasing most fans; though whether his trade value is irreparably diminished still remains to be seen.